Overview

John Hinderaker’s practice includes trial and appellate litigation. He focuses on real estate litigation, land use litigation, eminent domain/condemnation and construction litigation. John has successfully tried cases to verdict in Tucson, Phoenix and Bisbee and handled appeals before the Arizona Court of Appeals and the Arizona Supreme Court. John works to understand his clients’ needs and objectives. He then strives to work within budgets approved by his clients to accomplish his clients’ goals, whether through settlement, trial or appeal.

Related Services

Related Industries

Representative Matters

Represented a materials supplier in a challenge brought by a general contractor to the validity of a materialman’s lien. Following a trial, the court entered judgment for Mr. Hinderaker’s client and awarded attorneys’ fees.

Represented a group of investors who purchased intellectual property rights from two individuals. Following a trial, the court found that the defendants had committed fraud and entered judgment for over $1 million in favor of Mr. Hinderaker’s client.

Successfully challenged the validity of a provision in the City of Tucson’s building code that required property owners to complete a burdensome “historic review process” before redeveloping their property.

Represented a manufactured home park when the City of Benson, Arizona stopped recognizing the park’s nonconforming use rights after 40 years of operation and refused to issue permits for replacement homes. The client’s property rights were reestablished after four years of litigation that included a successful appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court. Stagecoach Trails MHC, LLC v. City of Benson, 295 P.3d 943 (2013). In a companion case filed in federal court, the client asserted civil rights violations under 42 USC Section 1983 and ultimately reached a monetary settlement with the City.

Represented an intervenor-defendant in litigation brought by the City of Tucson to challenge a state law prohibiting certain practices in municipal elections. The case was ultimately decided by the Arizona Supreme Court. City of Tucson v. State, 229 Ariz. 172, 273 P.3d 624 (2012).

Represented a private property owner who appealed the denial by the Santa Cruz County Board of Adjustment of a conditional use permit needed to construct a church complex. The appeal challenged the denial under RLUIPA and the Arizona Free Exercise of Religion Act. Following an evidentiary hearing, the Court overturned the denial and ordered Santa Cruz County to issue the permit. Mr. Hinderaker then filed a companion case asserting civil rights violations that led to a monetary settlement with Santa Cruz County.